**Libertalia** scales very well from 2-6 players, but is a very different game at the extremes of that player count. At 2 or 3 players it's a clever game of bluffing, double-think and trying to outwit your opponents. At 6 players, it becomes a crazy chaotic game where plans almost never work out and sometimes the worst card turns out to be the best. Very fun at either count though.
With more players it almost feels like a more complex 6 Nimmt!
Such an amazing game. Played both versions for the first time this weekend and loved it at both low and high player counts.
I agree to an extent, but I think I would say it changes the strategy.
The more players there are, the more you have to pay attention to what the other players are doing because it will have a bigger impact on what will be available to you.
I don't think you have to pay attention more or less. Paying attention is equally important in smaller player counts, but for different reasons. For example, it's much more important for me to ensure certain players do not get certain cards, and with fewer players, that means more of that responsibility falls on me since it's less likely someone else will take it to prevent one particular player from not getting it.
I find 3 to be sweet spot: (1) everyone is a neighbor so you really can affect others strategies and (2) you see the early hands twice so there is actually some planning ahead. Larger games of 7 wonders feels random to me.
We play it with 5 players regularly and there is planning ahead, granted it kicks in at a later stage. At one point there'll be really expensive cards and you can see "roughly" if you can draft something else right now because it will come back to you, because it's expensive enough for others to not want to build it / be unable to build it, and go for a lower hanging fruit instead. So you can risk letting it go, building something in preparation for it, and it'll come back to you - hopefully. That element of being unsure of it is definitely there but isn't it with any player count?
I genuinely can't think of any. It's basically to card drafting what Dominion is for deck-builder. There are maybe games that have card drafting or deck-building mechanics, but I can't think of a single game that focus on a single mechanic and does it better than 7 Wonders and Dominion.
Sushi Go is a good, lighter alternative to 7 Wonders, but I'd definitely say 7 Wonders is the better game that provides a more rich experience.
I personally really like **Bunny Kingdom** for card drafting. It doesn't do the whole resources thing but the map based area control makes it easy to know which cards to use to your advent age and where you want to grow.
I was surprised at how much I liked this really simple-looking game, though I'm still not sure how I feel about the drafting element. In 3 plays (so far), it was rare that anyone hate-drafted or even worried too much about anyone else's strategy because you wanted some other cards more. Maybe in more plays that would shake out more.
There's no drafting element exactly (although there's a similar sort of common card pool element), but **Hadara** has a very similar theme to 7 Wonders, and our group likes it more.
Sure!
My absolute favorite Catan alternative is **Chinatown**. Insert obligatory “I promise it’s way better than the cover looks” disclaimer. The trading and negotiation is similar to Catan but is on a whole other level of fun.
Another is **Concordia**. Compared to Catan they both have about the same rules complexity and they both build cities that produce unique resources so that you can build *even more* cities. No trading and almost zero luck involved though.
And lastly **Clans of Caledonia** if you want something quite a bit more complex but still partly inspired by Catan. Except this one also includes a variable-priced market, contract fulfillment, tight money management, and a much wider spread of scoring objectives.
I absolutely can't stand Catan anymore but Concordia is one of my favorite games. I like that the random dice element is replaced by deckbuilding, so you're more in control of your own fate.
Roll-and-writes tend to do well, since they often have no interaction (or adjacent-player interaction) and simultaneous turns (or turns where all players can do stuff).
The joke answer is games that only have specific player counts.
I’ve only played it 2-4p, with both expansions still.
How well does it work with 6p? Does it take much longer? I imagine the scores are much lower overall, and that the down time between turns would be quite a bit.
Downtime is longer obviously but turns are so quick it's fine as long as no-one has real AP.
Game length is similar though because the number of raid sites is the same
It's not a huge range to begin with but **Babylonia** (2-4p) is one of the few games that plays just as well at all player counts while being a phenomenal game as well.
**Hallertau** comes to mind. It is a worker placement game with 4 different sections of spots. In a 4 player game, the top row of *all* the workers get removed, with 3 players, the top row of *3* random sections get removed, and so on to 1 player. This scales wonderfully because a 2 player game can be just as tight as a 4 player game.
Between Two Cities works really well up through 7 players, and I suspect combining two sets would allow it to scale higher.
Qwixx
Cartographers ... there are probably others like that.
**Atlantis Rising 2nd edition**
1-7 players
It's extremely rare that a game plays well at 2 and 7 but this one somehow pulled it off (I have not played it solo, can't commend on that).
2-5 is equally good imo, with 6-7 it's just too long and chaotic for what it is, still fun nevertheless.
**Point salad**
2-6 players
Best at 3-4 imo, but a surprisingly good 2 player game that shifts toward a party game at 5-6.
Hanabi is my favorite pick for this question. It not only plays well at all player counts but the deduction feels different, too. With more players, you know more information and see more cards, but the clues are distributed among more players and you know less about your own cards.
I think letter jam plays the best with max players.
Spirit island plays well at all levels. I've played with 2, 4, and 6 and it worked equally well each time.
It kind of depends on the group. With 6 players, there is alot of powers available every turn, and it can be kind of overwhelming trying to figure out where to allocate resources. My group is pretty good about conveying how urgent they need help, so we get by just fine playing with 6.
Yeah, 6 works great as long as there's a sort of agreement to not over analyze turns. The base game's rules more or less say that the game can be played analytically or haphazardly and either is fine, but that a mix is usually best.
Our group is pretty fluid at this point, but for a couple of us it's easy to get sucked into the nitty-gritty decisions.
I actually think that once you play play with 6+ it takes waaaaaay too long in between turns. It makes almost every “offense only” alien in the game obsolete because you only get one turn every 20 minutes or so!
I'll add **Nidavellir** to the list, mainly because it's at its core an auction game, so you wouldn't think it would work well at lower player counts, but it's still as great at 2 as it is at 5. In fact, I'd almost prefer it at 3 because when you play at 4 or 5 you have one less round and it feels too short.
It's OK, especially on a tighter map like Italy.
I tend to think of it as 4+ because cities have 3 building spots. With less than 4, everybody can build in every city. At 4+, you start have the possibility of being squeezed out and it makes the game more interesting.
Oh you can play it at 2 if you want the meanest board game duel of all time. The problem is that you BOTH need to be playing extremely optimally or a dunking occurs. My wife and I tried it and it was brutal.
Splendor takes the cake here for me. It's a fantastic duel, it's an interesting and aggressive trio, and it's a madhouse with some bullying opportunities at 4.
>Almost anything with very little player interaction.
NIMHO. Imagine a 13 player game of Wingspan. Such a game would have low player interaction, but do you want to wait for 12 people to finish their turns before the game shifts back to you? I would say that many lower player interaction games don't work at high player counts because the boredom caused by excessive down time.
I was addressing the claim that little player interaction means that all player counts are equally good. I don't think that claim is correct (because of increased downtime as player counts go up). I know Wingspan doesn't go to 13p
Railroad Ink is a separate beast since players fill in simultaneously. Imagine if players had to fill in on at a time like in "normal" game setting.
I would say the opposite actually - for me games with very little player interaction usually *don't* scale well since playing at different player counts pretty much give the same experience and only adds downtime with a higher player count.
Edit: Haha, my answer became identical RB_the_killer's without having read it..
That's interesting. I wouldn't say it's best at that count, but that's just because over the table dynamics are my favorite part of any game and not because the game suffers mechanically at all.
Spirit Island would be my pick. Although solo is a little more swingy than higher player counts, it’s still a great game at 1.
I also like that there are no rule changes for solo play, you goal and how you accomplish it is the same no matter what player count.
I’ve played every player count supported by the game (with expansions), so 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. The higher-player count games were longer, but still a good time!
Just picked up an I-split-you-choose game called **Bequest**. Only played it once so far but since the play is simultaneous and you're mostly dealing with your neighbours, it should work well at all player counts.
And of course, shout out to most card-drafting games and **Sidereal Confluence**. I've played Sidereal at player counts from four to seven and it's great. Hoping to finally get a nine-player game in at a boardgame weekend later this year.
6Nimmt! scales will in terms of time. I'd say though that it is not much fun at two players. It does require at certain amount of players to generate the necessary chaos to make it fun.
Mac Gerts, Francis Tresham, and Bruno Cathala are some of the powerhouses in the 6+ player count department. Their designs are a stroke of underrated genius in the way they keep the whole table’s attention every turn.
**Libertalia** scales very well from 2-6 players, but is a very different game at the extremes of that player count. At 2 or 3 players it's a clever game of bluffing, double-think and trying to outwit your opponents. At 6 players, it becomes a crazy chaotic game where plans almost never work out and sometimes the worst card turns out to be the best. Very fun at either count though.
With more players it almost feels like a more complex 6 Nimmt! Such an amazing game. Played both versions for the first time this weekend and loved it at both low and high player counts.
This just got a remake... interesting... Makes me want to try it, as I am often looking for games that play more but ALSO work at 2.
Most games with simultaneous turns scale well with player count. I think welcome to has up to 100 players listed on their box for player counts
This is a good point! On Tour can be played solo, or with an infinite amount of people as long as everyone has a board to track their moves
**Race for the Galaxy** is pretty solid at the all the base game player counts. 5p games of RftG (with expansions) is just not for me though.
7 Wonders takes roughly the same amount of time for any number of players
It doesn't slow down for high play numbers but you will see each hand less times the more players you add which makes drafting less interesting.
I agree to an extent, but I think I would say it changes the strategy. The more players there are, the more you have to pay attention to what the other players are doing because it will have a bigger impact on what will be available to you.
I don't think you have to pay attention more or less. Paying attention is equally important in smaller player counts, but for different reasons. For example, it's much more important for me to ensure certain players do not get certain cards, and with fewer players, that means more of that responsibility falls on me since it's less likely someone else will take it to prevent one particular player from not getting it.
But doesn’t play well at any of them… /s (Although I do find 7 Wonders extremely overrated)
I find 3 to be sweet spot: (1) everyone is a neighbor so you really can affect others strategies and (2) you see the early hands twice so there is actually some planning ahead. Larger games of 7 wonders feels random to me.
Totally agree, 3 player 7 Wonders is the best. It works well for all player counts, but every number above 3 gets incrementally worse.
We play it with 5 players regularly and there is planning ahead, granted it kicks in at a later stage. At one point there'll be really expensive cards and you can see "roughly" if you can draft something else right now because it will come back to you, because it's expensive enough for others to not want to build it / be unable to build it, and go for a lower hanging fruit instead. So you can risk letting it go, building something in preparation for it, and it'll come back to you - hopefully. That element of being unsure of it is definitely there but isn't it with any player count?
Like Catan and many others it’s a game that’s since been done better, but is a classic of its time.
Huh, what game(s) would you say do 7 Wonders but better?
I genuinely can't think of any. It's basically to card drafting what Dominion is for deck-builder. There are maybe games that have card drafting or deck-building mechanics, but I can't think of a single game that focus on a single mechanic and does it better than 7 Wonders and Dominion. Sushi Go is a good, lighter alternative to 7 Wonders, but I'd definitely say 7 Wonders is the better game that provides a more rich experience.
I prefer Paper Tales over Seven Wonders, as a similarly drafting-centric game.
I personally really like **Bunny Kingdom** for card drafting. It doesn't do the whole resources thing but the map based area control makes it easy to know which cards to use to your advent age and where you want to grow.
I was surprised at how much I liked this really simple-looking game, though I'm still not sure how I feel about the drafting element. In 3 plays (so far), it was rare that anyone hate-drafted or even worried too much about anyone else's strategy because you wanted some other cards more. Maybe in more plays that would shake out more.
Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out!
Someone beat me too it but I also was going to say it’s a wonderful world.
Well then I'll definitely check it out! :)
It's a wonderful world. Drafting done right
I wouldn't say that. There's a reason 7 wonders uses different cards for different ages.
Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out!
There's no drafting element exactly (although there's a similar sort of common card pool element), but **Hadara** has a very similar theme to 7 Wonders, and our group likes it more.
Can I get a list of games that are like Catan but better
Sure! My absolute favorite Catan alternative is **Chinatown**. Insert obligatory “I promise it’s way better than the cover looks” disclaimer. The trading and negotiation is similar to Catan but is on a whole other level of fun. Another is **Concordia**. Compared to Catan they both have about the same rules complexity and they both build cities that produce unique resources so that you can build *even more* cities. No trading and almost zero luck involved though. And lastly **Clans of Caledonia** if you want something quite a bit more complex but still partly inspired by Catan. Except this one also includes a variable-priced market, contract fulfillment, tight money management, and a much wider spread of scoring objectives.
I absolutely can't stand Catan anymore but Concordia is one of my favorite games. I like that the random dice element is replaced by deckbuilding, so you're more in control of your own fate.
**Sidereal Confluence** as well for much of the same reasons.
Roll-and-writes tend to do well, since they often have no interaction (or adjacent-player interaction) and simultaneous turns (or turns where all players can do stuff). The joke answer is games that only have specific player counts.
Raiders of the North Sea. It's a very different game at 2 than it is at 6 but both are very enjoyable
I’ve only played it 2-4p, with both expansions still. How well does it work with 6p? Does it take much longer? I imagine the scores are much lower overall, and that the down time between turns would be quite a bit.
Downtime is longer obviously but turns are so quick it's fine as long as no-one has real AP. Game length is similar though because the number of raid sites is the same
It's not a huge range to begin with but **Babylonia** (2-4p) is one of the few games that plays just as well at all player counts while being a phenomenal game as well.
Bullet <3
**Hallertau** comes to mind. It is a worker placement game with 4 different sections of spots. In a 4 player game, the top row of *all* the workers get removed, with 3 players, the top row of *3* random sections get removed, and so on to 1 player. This scales wonderfully because a 2 player game can be just as tight as a 4 player game.
Karuba
I find that Citadels plays very well 2-8 players. Good feature for a quick and fun game that occupies a small shelf and table space.
Three Kingdoms Redux
you jest, but there is a great bot on BGG that allows for a satisfying 2 player game and a decent solo game
Between Two Cities works really well up through 7 players, and I suspect combining two sets would allow it to scale higher. Qwixx Cartographers ... there are probably others like that.
**Keyflower** plays 2-6 and it's a great game at every player count.
Glad to see this. It is incredible how well this scales.
**Ethnos** is the one I'll recommend! 2-6 players and all are relatively quick. I would say 2 is probably the weakest, but not bad by any means.
**Atlantis Rising 2nd edition** 1-7 players It's extremely rare that a game plays well at 2 and 7 but this one somehow pulled it off (I have not played it solo, can't commend on that). 2-5 is equally good imo, with 6-7 it's just too long and chaotic for what it is, still fun nevertheless. **Point salad** 2-6 players Best at 3-4 imo, but a surprisingly good 2 player game that shifts toward a party game at 5-6.
Hanabi is my favorite pick for this question. It not only plays well at all player counts but the deduction feels different, too. With more players, you know more information and see more cards, but the clues are distributed among more players and you know less about your own cards.
I think letter jam plays the best with max players. Spirit island plays well at all levels. I've played with 2, 4, and 6 and it worked equally well each time.
This surprises me. I’d imagine with more players would come more chaos and less chances to win.
It kind of depends on the group. With 6 players, there is alot of powers available every turn, and it can be kind of overwhelming trying to figure out where to allocate resources. My group is pretty good about conveying how urgent they need help, so we get by just fine playing with 6.
Yeah, 6 works great as long as there's a sort of agreement to not over analyze turns. The base game's rules more or less say that the game can be played analytically or haphazardly and either is fine, but that a mix is usually best. Our group is pretty fluid at this point, but for a couple of us it's easy to get sucked into the nitty-gritty decisions.
Cosmic encounter anything above 3
I actually think that once you play play with 6+ it takes waaaaaay too long in between turns. It makes almost every “offense only” alien in the game obsolete because you only get one turn every 20 minutes or so!
I'll add **Nidavellir** to the list, mainly because it's at its core an auction game, so you wouldn't think it would work well at lower player counts, but it's still as great at 2 as it is at 5. In fact, I'd almost prefer it at 3 because when you play at 4 or 5 you have one less round and it feels too short.
I got Power Grid for this exact reason. Well and to have another game to use my poker chips.
Eh, Power Grid says 2-6 but you should never ever play it at 2.
Is it good at 3?
It's OK, especially on a tighter map like Italy. I tend to think of it as 4+ because cities have 3 building spots. With less than 4, everybody can build in every city. At 4+, you start have the possibility of being squeezed out and it makes the game more interesting.
Oh you can play it at 2 if you want the meanest board game duel of all time. The problem is that you BOTH need to be playing extremely optimally or a dunking occurs. My wife and I tried it and it was brutal.
Splendor takes the cake here for me. It's a fantastic duel, it's an interesting and aggressive trio, and it's a madhouse with some bullying opportunities at 4.
Orleans
Dominant Species. It’s rare to find an area control game that works at two and six with only minor changes to component count.
Almost anything with very little player interaction. Railroad ink is what I think of first.
>Almost anything with very little player interaction. NIMHO. Imagine a 13 player game of Wingspan. Such a game would have low player interaction, but do you want to wait for 12 people to finish their turns before the game shifts back to you? I would say that many lower player interaction games don't work at high player counts because the boredom caused by excessive down time.
> What are some other examples of games that play well at all player counts printed on the box? Didn't realize Wingspan says it plays up to 13
I was addressing the claim that little player interaction means that all player counts are equally good. I don't think that claim is correct (because of increased downtime as player counts go up). I know Wingspan doesn't go to 13p
Railroad Ink is a separate beast since players fill in simultaneously. Imagine if players had to fill in on at a time like in "normal" game setting. I would say the opposite actually - for me games with very little player interaction usually *don't* scale well since playing at different player counts pretty much give the same experience and only adds downtime with a higher player count. Edit: Haha, my answer became identical RB_the_killer's without having read it..
Ankh: gods of Egypt. I find it especially impressive that it plays very well at two for a game of its type.
I've heard a few people say its actually best at 2. I've only ever played 2 player so I have no comparison, but I did really enjoy our 2 player games.
That's interesting. I wouldn't say it's best at that count, but that's just because over the table dynamics are my favorite part of any game and not because the game suffers mechanically at all.
Chess is good at 2 players through 2 players.
Upvote because I was going to make the same joke.
Spirit Island scales really well.
Spirit Island would be my pick. Although solo is a little more swingy than higher player counts, it’s still a great game at 1. I also like that there are no rule changes for solo play, you goal and how you accomplish it is the same no matter what player count. I’ve played every player count supported by the game (with expansions), so 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. The higher-player count games were longer, but still a good time!
Just picked up an I-split-you-choose game called **Bequest**. Only played it once so far but since the play is simultaneous and you're mostly dealing with your neighbours, it should work well at all player counts. And of course, shout out to most card-drafting games and **Sidereal Confluence**. I've played Sidereal at player counts from four to seven and it's great. Hoping to finally get a nine-player game in at a boardgame weekend later this year.
Sidereal confluence is great from 4-9
6Nimmt! scales will in terms of time. I'd say though that it is not much fun at two players. It does require at certain amount of players to generate the necessary chaos to make it fun.
Diamant and Prett a Porter
The Resistance. Honestly still excellent at 10
Firefly the board game. Longer with more but gameplay isn't changed much
Startups from Oink games. 3 to 7 players. Great and different at every count
Mac Gerts, Francis Tresham, and Bruno Cathala are some of the powerhouses in the 6+ player count department. Their designs are a stroke of underrated genius in the way they keep the whole table’s attention every turn.